Computing

Some time ago I wrote an article questioning 'who rules China'. Circumstantial evidence suggested that a covert lobby comprising elements of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), Chinese Communist Party and the overseas Chinese based mostly in Southeast Asia, who owned over 60 percent of the assets in China, could overrule pronouncements of the Chinese President and the Chinese Premier. Several examples of this happening were cited.

Now a revelation from Wikileaks provokes the question of who rules America.

Is America a subverted nation serving the interests of China rather than of the United States?

The spate of errors recently committed by Indian security raised the obvious question whether these arose from incompetence or sabotage. Well, the degree of errors committed by the American government over the past three decades pose the same question with much greater emphasis. Diplomatic cables leaked by Wikileaks reveal that Benazir Bhutto, after the bomb explosion that greeted her when she first landed in Karachi on her return to Pakistan, requested the US government to provide her security because she had evidence that her enemies were out to kill her. She claimed that there were elements in the Musharraf government that were plotting her assassination. America refused to provide her security stating that to do so in an election campaign in Pakistan would seem improper. Bhutto was advised to cooperate with the Musharraf government.

The US response was astounding. Could not the CIA have arranged covert private security to safeguard Bhutto? Recently it had no hesitation in deploying Raymond Davies clandestinely in Pakistan when it was required. Not surprisingly, Benazir Bhutto was killed. Immediately after that I offered an explanation for her murder. She was killed because she came with an agenda unacceptable to the vested interests that controlled Pakistan. Benazir was the only South Asian politician to state publicly what I had always advocated. She wanted to create a South Asian Union inspired by the European Union. Before leaving the US for Pakistan Benazir said: “Learning from Europe following World War II, we will build democracies and common markets, we will open up markets, we will open up roads and we will open up endless opportunities for the people of South Asia.”

How would the Al Qaeda, committed as it was to the creation of global Jihad and a fundamentalist empire in the region, have responded to this? How must have China, which signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the Taliban approved by Osama bin Laden on 9/11, 2001, have reacted to this? China had been propping up Pakistan for many decades with missiles and a nuclear arsenal to confront India and keep South Asia divided. That is why Benazir posed a threat to the most powerful vested interests in Pakistan. That is why with the collusion of the hard liners within the Pakistan military supporting Al Qaeda and the PLA, Benazir was killed. The question arises, was America oblivious of the high stakes involved in safeguarding Benazir’s safety after her specific warnings? Or was America unbelievably stupid? Or is America a subverted nation serving the interests of China rather than of the United States?

There is much evidence to favour the possibility of subversion. For years I have described the unholy nexus between America’s corporate business lobby and the PLA as the world’s real axis of evil.

Consider this. For over three decades America allowed a five-to-one adverse balance of trade with the world’s biggest dictatorship importing for the most part low tech consumer items manufactured in factories owned by the PLA. With its export earnings the PLA built the world’s largest army. America degenerated from being the lone global superpower to a nation owing trillions of dollars to China and become its hostage.

During all this time America remained a helpless spectator while with Chinese support Pakistan became the hub of global terrorism and China’s retail outlet for nuclear proliferation. This same helpless America did not hesitate to divert the war on terror against Taliban and Al Qaeda from Afghanistan to Iraq on the basis of false allegations that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Not surprisingly, Osama bin Laden escaped from Afghanistan to Pakistan where he lived comfortably in the protective custody of the Pakistan army until his recent assassination. American big business made short term gain through earning huge profit by using underpaid workers in manufacturing units set up in China. By diverting investment from the domestic market to China, American big business increased unemployment in the US. American politicians bribed by Beijing turned a blind eye as US security was being raped. One PLA agent actually funded an American President inside the White House! The long term gain from this nexus accrued only to China.

In the light of this, what should one conclude? Is America unbelievably stupid or is it subverted? Only in his second term did President George Bush attempt to reverse policy and halt subversion. President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton are carrying forward that attempt. President Obama is trying to reverse US policy in the Middle East, towards China and towards Pakistan. Time will tell whether he succeeds. For success, he will have to ruthlessly deal with enemies within America. Will President Obama prevail or will he be derailed?

Meanwhile India, while welcoming President Obama’s effort, must exercise extreme caution while dealing with America. The US speaks with many voices. Often its actions belie its words. India must remain focused on its core interests. It must not thoughtlessly support policies that strengthen China at India’s cost. It must learn to discriminate between suggestions offered by mainline America and subverted America.

To my own understanding and belief, USA had to go for globalization, pushing its corporate to shift operations to low cost countries to the extent possible, and this was a well thought strategy.

Imagine, without globalization, a 20 page A5 size notebook being sold at $2 (Or Rs. 80 ($1=Rs. 40)) while similar notebook being sold at Rs. 8 in India….. such a big gap existed only to be filled slowly or suddenly.

Such a difference existed because of trade of high end technological product – currencies of all so called poor countries were traded weak against dollar because they were heavily dependent upon developed countries to supply technological products (machines, weaponry, software systems, electronics etc.)

Combine this with the fact that advanced countries understood that advance technologies would not remain their sole property and that one day in future the under-developed countries would reach their equivalent.

In such a scenario, USA - economically most advance country, had to find ways to keep upper hand. This - I believe, triggered globalization drive, and European capitalist countries joined the efforts.

This was the reason (I believe) why American Industries went to China and many other places including India. China due to its policies, manpower and under-developed indigenous industry offered America companies a place to flourish.

To this extent, it was America serving America's interests. (generally trade helps both sides, so the other country would also gain something, but the main objective was to keep Americas upper hand while others may gain below the upper hand).

The same opportunity existed in front of every country, some utilized it to their own benefit, some missed it and some others got exploited.

With these lines of thought, China effectively leveraged the opportunities to its benefit.

And in general, everything seems good in personality/society/organization when it is successful.

Is this why we tend to believe that everything worked in China's hands ?

In the same situation, had India worked out a suitable strategy (or it can now to give a new direction), it would seem that America worked for Indian interests !

What I believe is that Americans saved themselves by avoiding a potential disaster, those who took benefit of the opportunity seems to be the driver of all this simply because they are highly successful today.

At the same time, I believe, if USA can not sustain it’s superiority (which they might have discovered before globalization drive), then the credit and importance given to USA for it’s achievements is too high and may need readjustments.